HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.07 Bishoffl Vicious Dog CITY CLERK
' 'IL I o1IOl I t
. Fi!e #t '
'AGENDA STATEMENT
'CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: .IANUARY 20, 2004
SUBJECT: Resolution Denying Bischoff Appeal of Determination
Regarding Vicious Dog ("Buddy")
(Report prepared by Elizabeth H. Silver, City Attorney)
ATTACItMENTS: 1. Dmf~ Resolution Making Findings, Denying the
Appeal of Bischoff Family by Michael Bischoff, and
Affirming the Decision of the City Manager Finding That
the Dog "Buddy" is a Vicious Dog and Should Not Be
Returned to His Owner, Robert Bischoff
2. Staff Report and attachments from January 6, 2004
public hearing
3. Packet of Materials submitted by Michael Bischoff at
January 6, 2004 public hearing
4. Written comments submitted at public hearing
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Draft Resolution Making Findings, Denying the
Appeal of Bischoff Family by Michael Bischoff, and
Affirming the Decision of the City Manager Finding That
the Dog "Buddy" is a Vicious Dog and Should Not Be
Returned to His Owner, Robert Bisehoff
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None.
DESCRIPTION: Michael Bischoff, on behalf of the Bischoff family, appealed the determination that
the dog "Buddy" is a vicious dog and should not be returned to his owner, Robert Bischoff. The City
Council, at its January 6, 2004 meeting, heard Michael Bischoff's appeal pursuant to Dublin Municipal
Code §5.36.080, which provides that any person aggrieved by an administrative decision pursuant to
§5.36, may appeal the decision to the City Council. The Council, by a "straw" vote of four with one
absence, voted to deny the appeal. The attached Resolution has been prepared by the City Attorney, based
on the comments of Couneilmembers and the straw vote.
Recommendation:
Adopt the resolution (Attachment 1).
G/1-20~04/as-bischoffVD-appeal.doc
COPIES TO: Robert Bischoff j ~._.
Michael Bischoff
ITEM NO.
G:\CC-MTGS~2004-QTRlUAi~01-20-04L4-S-BISCHOFFVD-APPEAL-DOC i~[
RESOLUTION NO. - 04
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
MAKING FINDINGS, DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE BiSCHOFF FAMILY
BY MICHAEL BISCHOFF, AND AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE
CITY MANAGER FINDING THAT THE DOG "BUDDY" IS A VICIOUS DOG
AND SHOULD NOT BE RETURNED TO HIS OWNER~ ROBERT BISCHOFF
RECITALS
WHEREAS, MiChael Bischoff, on behalf of the Bischoff family, appealed the determination that
the dog "Buddy" is a vicious dog and should notbe returned to Michael Bisehoff's son, Robert Bischoff,
the owner of "Buddy"; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, at its January 6, 2004 meeting, heard Michael Bischoff's appeal
pursuant to Dublin Municipal Code §5.36.080, which provides that any person aggrieved by an
administrative decision pursuant to §5.36, may appeal the decision to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the appeal process, set forth in Dublin Municipal Code § 1.04.050, requires the
appellant to show cause, on grounds specified in the notice of appeal, why the action excepted to should
not be upheld; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Food and Agriculture Code §31621, the City may adopt an administrative
hearing proeedureto hear and dispose of petitions regarding vicious or potentially dangerous dogs; and
WHEREAS, once a vicious clog'determination has been made, if the dog owner contests the
determination, §31622 of the Food and AgriCulture Code provides that the dog owner may appeal the
decision to the superior court. Upon appeal, the superior court shall conduct a de novo hearing in order to
make its own determination regarding the dog's viciousness; and
WHEREAS, Food and Agriculture Code §31683 provides that nothing in that chapter shall be
construed to prevent the City from adopting its own administrative hearing procedure; and
WHEREAS, on September 17, 2003, staff received a report from Alameda County Animal
Control regarding a dog bite incident occurring on August 28, 2003. The report stated that a loose dog,
Buddy, bit a young man while he was riding down the street. The victim received three puncture wounds
and two surface abrasions on the right buttock; and
WHEREAS, the animal control officer's report recommended that a vicious dog hearing be
conducted. Pursuant to Dublin Municipal Code §5.36.020, the hearing was scheduled for September 24,
2003; and the Hearing Notice was mailed to the dog owner via gu'st class mail and certifed mail, return
receipt requested. Robert Bischoff, Buddy's owner, signed for the certified notice on September 19,
2003; and
WHEREAS, the vicious dog hearing was conducted in accordance with Chapter 5.36 of the
Dublin Municipal Code, on September 24, 2003. Robert Bischoff failed to appear for the hearing. Based
upon information contained within the Animal Control report, Buddy was declared vicious, pursuant to
DMC §5.26.290(A)(1)-(2); and '~
Attachment 1
WHEREAS, the Findings & Order from the vicious dog hearing were issued on Septembgr 25,
2003; and I
WHEREAS, the Findings & Order were mailed via first class mail and certified mail, re~tUm
recei ~t r uested, on September 25, 2003 to Robert Bischoff The certified mail copy was returned to the
P ecl ' ' ...... t
City of Dublin on October 23, 2003, with the notation that dehvery was attempted three tunes,
remmed to sender as "unclaimed." An Animal Control Officer personally served the Findings &~ Order
on Robert Bischoff on November 7, 2003; and
c d
WHEREAS, on November 7, 2003, Buddy was loose and roaming the City when he was pi ke
up by Animal Control. On November 10, 2003, Buddy was again running loose in violation of the
findings and bit a twelve-year-old boy. He was again picked up by Animal Control and held at ~e shelter
pending another viciOus dog hearing. The Animal Control report regarding this bite, received bY the City
of Dublin on November 21, 2003, recommended that a vicious dog hearing be conducted; and
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2003, a vicious dog hearing was scheduled for Novemberi25,. 2003,
to address concerns that the dog owner did not comply with certain restrictions placed on the dog at the
September hearing. Notice of the November 25th, 2003, hearing was mailed to the dog owner v~a first
class mail, and in addition, staff sent an additional notice by certified mail, remm receipt reques ,t~xl. The
first class mail copy has not been returned to the City and the certified mail copy of the findings was
returned to the City of Dublin on December 19, 2003, with the notation that delivery was attemp~ted two
times, but returned to sender as 'hmclaimed;" and
WHEREAS, on the afternoon of November 24, 2003, staff received a telephone call from Michael
Bischoff, the dog owner's father, inquiring about the hearing date and time. He was advised tha~ the
hearing was scheduled for the following day, November 25, 2003, at 9:30 AM; and
WHEREAS, on November 25, 2003, the vicious dog hearing was conducted in accordan~ with
Chapter 5.36 of the Dublin Municipal Code. Robert Bischoff, the dog owner, was in attendance '. at this
heating. At no time during the hearing did Robert Bischoffdiscuss concerns regarding lack ofnbtice for
this hearing, nor did he ask for a continuation of the hearing in order to prepare; and
WHEREAS, at the vicious dog hearing, the Hearing Director made the following findings:
· The evidence demonstrated, and the hearing officer found, that the dog owner waS in
violation of the prior hearing findings as he did not contact Animal Control withig 5 days
of mailing of the hearing findings to schedule an inspection of the property; and I
· The evidence further demonstrated that Buddy was running loose on both NOvember 7th
and November 10th, in violation of the previous hearing fmdings that required~th~ owner
to ensure that Buddy did not escape from the property; and 1
Additionally, the evidence demonstrated that on November 10th, Buddy bit a lve year
old boy while running loose, an attack that meets the criteria for a fmding of viciousness
pursuant to the Dublin Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, based upon information presented at the hearing, including testimony from ~e dog
owner and the Animal Control Officer, and the Animal Control repOrt that was received by the ',ity after
this hearing was scheduled, it was ordered that the dog not be returned to his owner; and
WHEREAS, before the Heating Director had even prepared and issued the written order, ?,obert
Bischoff filed an appeal in the Superior Court pursuant to provisions in the Food and Agriculture Code,
requesting that the dog be returned; and
WHEREAS, the City objected to the Court's jurisdiction because the findings had not be~:n issued
or served, and because Robert Bisehoff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies by appealing to the
City Council. The Court, in response to the City's objections, dismisSed the appeal; and
WHEREAS, on December 1, 2003, at the court hearing on the appeal, the Findings & O~ ter from
November 25, 2003 hearing were personally served on Robert Bischoff. The findings were also mailed to
Mr. Bischoff; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Dublin Municipal Code §5.36.080, Michael Bischoff, on behalf of the
Bischoff FamilY, appealed the Hearing Director's determination on the following grounds:
1. Improper Service of Hearings
2. Cover-Up of Proof of Service by City and County Employees; and
WHEREAS, the appeal was timely filed with respect to the November 25, 2003 Director s
decision, but was untimely with respect to the September 17, 2003 Director's decision.
WHEREAS, at the appeal hearing before the City Council, Robert Bischoff presented no evidence
and did not testify;
WHEREAS, the City Council heard testimony regarding the grounds of appeal from Amg
Cunningham and Michael Bischoff; and
WHEREAS, Amy Cunningham presented, as evidence, the Agenda Statement for Janum y 6, 2004,
which included a detailed chronology of the events and photocopies of service of notice of both ticious
dog hearings.
WHEREAS, Ms. Cunningham also testified that on December 9, 2003, the Bischoff family was
mailed a letter, notifying them that their appeal would be heard by the City Council on January 6, 2004.
In addition, Ms. Cunningham testified that on January 2, 2004, the Staff Report was mailed to the
Bischoff family and an officer made two attempts, both unsuccessful, to personally deliver the Staff
Report; and
WHEREAS, Michael Bischoff submitted no evidence to support the grounds of the appeal.
According to Michael Bischoff's testimony, he was served with notice of the appeal hearing on January 5'
2003, at 9 PM. Mr. Bischoff offered no credible evidence, however, to support his allegation that the City
improperly or did not serve notice of the September 24, 2003 or November 25th, 2003 vicious dOg
hearings; and ed]
WHEREAS, MiChael Bischoff offered testimony that the California Code of Civil Proc ute
requires that an additional five (5) days notice is required when notice is served by mail.
WHEREAS, hearings conducted pursuant to chapter 5.36 of the Dublin Municipal Code shall be
noticed according to the provisions set forth in that chapter. Dublin Municipal Code, §5.36.320 requires
that the Director shall either deliver or mail the hearing notice to the owner or person controllin i the dog
or other interested persons, at least five (5) calendar days prior to the date set for the hearing.
3
WHEREAS, in addition to hearing testimony from Michael Bischoff and Amy Cunningly. ~n, the
City Council also heard testimony, regarding Buddy's demeanor, from the following: Animal Ce ntrol
Officer George F. Potstada III, Darrell Banks, Catherine Burk, Justin Nofchisey, Erin Aguilar, ar ~d
Heather Horton.
FINDINGS
WHEREAS, after considering the apPlicable laws and deliberating on ail the evidence re~ ~ived,
the City COuncil, on the basis of the foregoing Recitals, finds as follows:
A. The City properly noticed both of the vicious dog hearings. The notice of the firs hearing
was mailed September 17, 2003, seven (7) days prior to the hearing date of September 24, 2003. Robert
Bischoff, the dog owner, had actual notice of the September hearing, as he signed for the certifie ~1 notice
on SePtember 19, 2003.
B. The notice of the second hearing was mailed November 19, 2003, six (6) dayS pti ~r to the
hearing date of November 25, 2003. The Bischoffs clearly had actual notice of the November 2~, 2003,
hearing since Michael Bischofftelephoned the Hearing Director the day prior to the hearing and ~nquired
of the date and time of the hearing. Additionally, Robert Bischoff attended this meeting.
C Neither Robert nor Michael Bischoffpresented any credible evidence that notice of either
hearing was not received.
D. Neither Robert nor Michael Bischoffhas appealed the Heanng Drrecto s detern~ nation
that Buddy is a vicious dog, nor has either presented evidence to counter the findings that Budd bit two
different people on two different occasions and is a vicious dog.
E. Within less than three months, the dog, Buddy, has escaped from the owner's ho te or
fenced-in yard on three documented occasions. On two of those occasions, the dog has attackedl~and
bitten people resulting in injurieS. The dog'S escapes from the PropertY and'bitin.g !ncident.s de~onstr~.te
that the dog owner has not taken preventative steps to protect the community, and that leavmg Buddy ~n
the care and control of the dog owner poses a serious threat to the community's safety.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Dublin hereby determines that the ] Iovember
25, 2003 appeal of Michael Bischoff, On behalf of the Bischoff Family, is denied and the decisiO3 ofthe
City Manager, acting as the Director regarding "Buddy" is hereby affirmed.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20t~ day of January, 2004 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
K2/G/1-20-04/reso-bischoff. doc (Item 4.7)
4
CITY CLERK
File # J [¥1 11 1-J-41
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 6, 2004
SUBJECT: Vicious Dog Hearing Appeal
Report Prepared by: Amy Cunningham, Administrative Analyst{
and John Bakker, Attorney at Law, Meyers, Nave, Riback, Silver
and Wilson
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Animal Control Report - August 2003
2. Photographs of Injury
3. Notice of Hearing - September 2003
4. Hearing Minutes - September 2003
5. Hearing Findings & Order - September 2003
6. Memorandum re: Proof of Service of Findings - November
2003
7. Animal Control Report- November 2003
8. Notice of Hearing - November 2003
9. Hearing Minutes - November 2003
10. Hearing Findings & Order - November 2003
11. Memorandum re: Proof of Service of Findings - December
2003
12. Letter of Appeal from the Bischoff Family
RECOMMENDATION: _ /l. Open public hearing
.~4~,~ 2. Receive staff and
report
public
comment
3. Close public hearing
4. Deliberate
5. Determination on appeal
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None
DESCRIPTION:
On September 17, 2003, staff received a report from Alameda County Animal Control regarding a dog
bite incident occurring on August 28, 2003. (Attachment 1 .) The report stated that a loose dog, Buddy,
bit a young man while he was riding his bike down the street. After the bite, the dog owner retrieved the
dog and took it back in the house. The victim received three puncture wounds and two surface abrasions
on the right buttock. (Photographs, Attachment 2)
The.animal control officer's report recommended that a vicious dog heating be conducted. Pursuant to
Dublin Municipal Code (DMC) §5.36.320, Notice of Hearing, the hearing was scheduled for September
COPIES TO: John Bakker
The £ischoff Famil, v
ITEl Att~c~me~t 2
H/cc-forms/agdastmt.doc
24, 2003; and the Hearing Notice (Attachment 3) was mailed to the dog owner via first class mail and
certified mail, return receipt requested. Robert Bischoff, Buddy's owner, signed for the certified notice on
September 19, 2003.
The vicious dog hearing was conducted in accordance with Chapter 5.36 of the 'Dublin Municipal Code,
on September 24, 2003. Mr. Bischoff failed'~to appear for the hearing. Based upon information contained
within the Animal Control report, Buddy was declared vicious, pursuant to DMC §5.26.290(A)(1)-(2).
Those sections provide that a dog is presumed vicious when it engages in:
· An attack which requires a defensive action by any person to prevent bodily injury or property
damage' when such person is conducting himself or herself peacefully and lawfully; and
· An attack which results in an injury to a person when~ such person is conducting hims~el{' or herself
peacefully and lawfully.
The hearing director found that Buddy caused the victim to take defensive 'action by chasing down the
street, and subsequently injured the victim when he was bit 6n the but/ock. (MinUtes, Attachment 4.)
The Findings & Order from the vicious dog hearing were iss~ed on September 25, 2003 (Attacllrnent 5),
with the following restrictions imposed:
The owner was to take adequate precautions to ensure that the dog was only out of the fenced backyard or
residence when on a six (6) foot leash, and under the direct 6~ntrol of a competent adUlt The d% owner
was to contact Animal Control for an inspection of the property within 15 days of issuance of the heanng
findings; and make recommended modifications within 50 d~ys of issuance of the findings. The dog was
to attend obedience training with proof of completion provided to the City. The dog owner was to notify
staff if the dog no longer resided in the Citv. The dog was to. be immediately quarantined, and another
hearing conducted, if there was a violation of any hearing finding.
As required by the Dublin Municipal Code, the Findings & ~rde; were mailed via first class m~il and
certified mail, return receipt requested, on September 25, 2003. The certified mail copy was retUrned to
the City of Dublin on October 23, 2003, with the notation that delivery was attempted three times, but
returned to sender as unclaimed. The code only requires that the findings be' certified mailed or
otherwise dehvered to the owner; ~t does not require that the mall actually be accepted. In this instance,
the findings were delivered to the dog owner. The first clasS 'mail copy was not returned to the City by the
Post Office. Further, an Animal Control Officer personally served the Findings & Order on Robert
Bischoff on November 7, 2003. (Attachment 6) .
Despite the hearing findings, the dog owner failed to contain the dog, and the dog continued to exhibit
vicious behavior. On November 7, 2003, Buddy was loose .arid roaming the City when he was picked up
by Animal Control. Due to a misunderstanding at the shelter, he was returned to his owner on November
8, 2003, without another hearing as required by the Findings & Order. On November 11, 2003,* Buddy
was again running loose in .violation of the findings and bit a twelve-year-old boy. He was again picked
up by Animal Control and held at the shelter pending another vicious dog hearing. The Animal' Control
report regarding this bite, received by the City of Dublin on November 21, 2003, recommended that a
vicious dog hearing be conducted. (Attachment 7)
On November 19, 2003, a vicious dog hearing was scheduled for November 25, 2003, to ad&ess concerns
that the dog owner did not comply with certain restrictions pl~tced on the dOg at the Septembe~ tiearing.
As required by the code, notice of the November 25th, 2003, hearing was mailed to the dog owner via first
class mail, and, in addition, staff sent an additional notice by certified mail, return receipt requested.
(Attachment 8) The first class mail copy has not been returned to the City and the certified mail copy of
the findings was returned to the City of Dublin on December 19, 2003, with the notation that delivery was
attempted two times, but returned to sender as "unclaimed. On the afternoon of November 24, 2003, staff
received a telePhone call from Michael Bischoff, the dog owner's father, inquiring about the hearing date
and time. He was advised that the hearing was scheduled for the following day, November 25,2~003, at
9:30 AM.
As scheduled, on November 25, 2003, the ;vicious dog hearing was conducted in accordance with Chapter
5.36 of the Dublin Municipal Code. Robert BischoffWas in attendance at this hearing. At no time during
the hearing did Robert Bischoff discuss concerns regarding lack of notice for this hearing nor did he ask
for a continuation of the hearing in order to prepare. (Attachment 9)
The hearing evidence demonstrated and the hearing officer found that the dog owner was in violation of
the prior hearing findings as he did not contact Animal Control within 15 days of mailing of the hearing
findings to schedule an inspection of the property. The hearing evidence further demonstrated that Buddy
was running loose on both November 7th and November 10th, in violation of the previous hearing findings
that required the owner to ensure that Buddy did not escape from the property. Additionally, the evidence
demonstrated that on November 10th, Buddy bit a twelve-year-old boy while running loose, an attack that
meets the criteria for a finding of viciousness pursuant to the DMC.
Based upon information presented at the hearing, including testimony from the dog owner and the Animal
Control Officer, and the Animal Control report that was received by the City after this hearing was
scheduled, it was ordered that the dog not be returned to his owner. (Attachment 10)
Before the Hearing Director had even prepared and issued the written order, Mr. Bischoff filed an appeal
in the Superior Court pursuant to provisions in the Food and Agriculture Code requesting that the dog be
returned. The City objected to the Court's jurisdiction, because the findings had not been issued or
served, and because Mr. Bischoff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies by appealing to the City
Council. The Court, in response to the City's objections, dismissed the appeal.
On December 1, 2003, at the court hearing on the appeal, the Findings & Order from the November 25,
2003, hearing were personally served on Robert Bischoff. (Attachment 11) The findings were also
mailed to Mr. Bischoff.
Pursuant to Dublin Municipal Code §5.36.080, the Bischoff Family appealed the Hearing Director's
determination (Attachment 12) on the following grounds:
1. Improper Service of Hearings
2. Cover-Up of Proof of Service by City and County Employees
The Bischoff family has presented no evidenCe to the City to support the grounds for their appeal.
All notices were completed as required by Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 5.36, Animal Control. DMC
§5.36.320, Notice of Hearing, specifies that a hearing date shall be set no later than ten (10) calendar days
from the date the Hearing Director has concluded that there is probable cause to believe that the'dog is
vicious. The Director shall "mail or otherwise deliver" the hearing notice to the owner or person
controlling the dog or other interested persons, at least five (5) calendar days prior to the date set for
hearing. The City's procedure for noticing the dog owner of the hearing date is to send the notice: (1). by
first class mail, with a proof of service on file signed under penalty of perjUry by the hearing seL'~etary;
and, althoUgh it is not specifically required by the code, (2) by certified mail, return receipt requested.
The notice of the first hearing was mailed September 17, 2003, seven (7) days prior to the heating date of
September 24, 2003. The notice of the second hearing was mailed November 19, 2003, six (6) days prior
to the hearing date of November 25, 2003. Thus,~ the City provided the required notice to Mr. Bischoff.
In addition, the Bischoffs clearly had actual notice of the November 25, 2003, hearing, since Michael
Bischofftelephoned the Hearing Director the day prior to the hearing and inquired of the date and time.
With regard to the notice of the issuance of the findings, DMC §5.36.340 specifies that the decision is to
be made in writing within ten (10) calendar days of conclusion of the hearing. A copyofthe decision is to
be sent by "certified mail or otherwise delivered" to the person owning or controlling the dog. The City's
procedure for notifying the dog owner of the decision is to send the notice: (1) by first class mail, with a
proof of service on file signed under penalty of perjury by the hearing secretary; and (2) by certified mail,
return receipt requested. The Findings & Order from the first hearing conducted September 24th were
mailed September 25, 2003, the day after the hearing. The Findings & Order from the second hearing
conducted November 25th were mailed December 1, 2003, six (6) days after the hearing was conducted.
In addition to mailing as outlined above, the Findings and Orders from both hearings were personally
served on the dog owner.
The findings issued as a result of these incidents are consistent with past findings and appropriate for the
circumstances. Within less than three months, the dog, Buddy, has escaped from the owner's home or
fenced yard on three documented occasions. On two of those occasions the dog has attacked and bitten
people resulting in injuries. The dog owner's negligence has led to these circumstances. After the August
bite incident, the dog owner, despite being provided with an opportunity, failed to comply with the
conditions established at the September hearing to ensure that the dog is adequately contained in the home
and/or yard. The dog's subsequent escapes from the property and second bite incident demonstrate, that
the dog owner has not taken preventative steps to protect the community, and that leaving Buddy in the
care and control of the dog owner poses a serious threat to the community's safety.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the Public Hearing, obtain any necessary information
from concerned parties, deliberate and determine whether or not the findings and determination of the
November 25, 2003, hearing should be upheld. If the City Council determines that said findings and
determination should not be upheld, the City Council will need to issue alternate findings regarding the
merits of the appeal and determine whether other restrictions should be imposed, or actions taken.
ALAMEDA CO UNTY SHERIFF 'S o ,-'FICE
.FIELD SER VICES
Page 1 of 2
'Type of Report: -Bite Detail Number: '152
Date of Report: 091103 Incident Date: 082803
Reporting Officer Bowman
Owner Bischoff Robert M 043085 18
Last Name First Name MI DOB Age
7609 Landale Ave Dublin 94568
Address City ZIP
925-828-1186
Home Telephone: Work Telephone:
Victim Carrillo-Zuniga Jack ~, 19
Last Name First Name' MI DOB Age
.~.-~ ~.~. Dublin 94568
Address City ZIP
Home Telephone: Work Telephone:
Guardian/
Witness Last Name First Name MI DOB Age
Address City ZIP
Home Telephone ~'~"~ %-"J~K~-~ V Zk,~) Work Telephone
~itness
~st Name r~ame PO~OE 8;RVIc:;~.~ DOB Age
Ad.ess Ci~ ~
Home Telephone: Work Telephone:
Animal: Dog Breed: -Rottwieler
Color: Black and Tan Se>r: Male
Age: 2 years Weight: 95 lbs.
Name: Buddy Rabies Tag No. Unknown
License No. 'None Cit3,: Dublin
Quarantined At Expired Master Sheet No. None
Vicious Dog Hearing Recommendation X Yes No Field Services Bite Form
ATTACHMENT 1
Page 2, of 2
Approximately 1100 hours, 090903, I received a report.of a dog bite incident from Dublin's Administrative
Analyst, Amy Cmmingham. I initiated detail 152.
At 1355 hours, Imade phone contact with Carrillo-Zuniga and he stated the following:
On 080803 at approximately 1445 hours, a Kottwieler bit.me. I was riding my bike down Landale Ave when I
saw ahead of me a dog run across the street. When I got closer the.dog was following me. These girls were
trying to get the dog so I turned around so the dog would follow me toward the girls. The dog started to growl
so I stopped and put my bike between the dog and me. The dog kept trying to get around the bike to get to me
so t kept jockeying around to .keep the bike between the dog and me. The girls t.9~l'~d, me the dog was friendly. I
let my guard down and dog came around and bit me. I picked up my bike and r~'~around until the girls came
over and tried to get the dog. The dog owner then came out and yelled at the girls to get the dog. He then ran
over, got the dog and slapped it a couple of times as he took it home.
Carrillo-Zuniga received the following injuries: 3 punctures and 2 surface abrasions to fight butt cheek
On'091103 at 1535 hours, I made phone contact ivith Bischoff and he stated the following:
As my girlfriend was leaving out the. front door my dog, Buddy, forced his way past her to get out. I was
outside headed toward Buddy when I saw this kid dancing around his bike to keep the dog away from him. I
saw Buddy bite the kid. I think Buddy was just playing. The kid said he was okay. Buddy knew he was in
trouble when I got to him. He Was laying down in a submissive manner.
I could not verify ifBischoff.dog was current on rabies. The dog was'not quarantined due to time lapsed.
Bischoff was issued a Warning for Biting or Attacking, Dog.at Large and given- ten days to license his dog.
A records check revealed no prior offenses.
I recom.mend a vicious dog hearing.
Officer.Bowman
CT:
RABIES CONTROL INYESTIGATION REPORT Report #
VCO: ALAMEDA COUNTY I-IEALTH CARE,SERVICES AGENCY
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH VECTOR CONTROL SERVICES DISTRICT MS#
Q/R:
Fo~ard yelloTM copy & quarantine notice within 48 hours to Vector Contro~ Distr~ct
NAME f~RS~) f~ ~ AGE
Bi~EN ADDRESS: NUMBER STREET CITY ZIP CODE TEL~ '~ ~ ';, ,'
LOCATION
INCIDENT
WAS
TREATMENT
GIVEN
TO
VI
3TIM?
~ NO F NO. DID YOU ADVISE VICTIM TO SEEK TREATMENT? YES NO
NAME OF PHYSICIAN OR HOSPITAL ~ A~ C~ ~ TELEPHONE NUMBER
DESCRIPTION OF ANIMAL i TYPE OF BITING ANIMAL:
STRAY
OWNER OF . WILD: SKUNK BAT OTHER
ADDRESS: NUMBER STREET
DESCRIPTION ~ [ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~.&L~-- ~ U COMPLAN THE FOLLOWING
C~Y ZiP CODE TELEPHONE NO.
AND AGE -- LESS THAN FOUR MONTHS
LOCATION ~L}~ ~q%-- ¢~
worse ~~ FOUR MONTHS AND OLDER
OF ~-IJ ~ NOT KNOWN
ANIMAL ANIMAL NOW UNDER QUAR~TINE? YES YES NOT KNOWN
LOCATION ANIMAL SHELTER ~ KENNEL ¢
LICENSE No.
VETERINARY HOSPITAL ~ OWNER'S PREMISES
VACCINATED BEFORE BITE:
YES NO
ADDRESS
DATE OF VACCINATION
TELEPHONE
NAMEabLE x -TELEPHONE NO. . DATE
INITIAL REPORT ¢/~L¢~, ~A~A~ ~~3~~ O~O~D
PREPARED BY s~,~,~.~.~ .NAME ' ' '
THAN VICTIM OR ~NER ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO,
DATE DATE CAS E
RECEIVED CLOSED CLOSED BY. HEAD SENTTO LABORATORY: REPORT RECEIVED
WITHIN 48 'H OURS OF A~ACK:
ANIMAL CHECK FOR YES DATE YES NO
PROPER ISOLATION? YES DATE NO STRAY RECOVERED:
YES NO NOT STRAY
RELEASED FROM QUARANTINE B~ DATE NO DATE VICTIM GIVEN ANTI-RAB[ESTREATMENT:
YES NO NOT KNOWN
ANIMAL: DIED? YES [::)ATE NO RESULTS
KILLED? YES DATE NO POSITIVE ~ COMPL~ THE FOLLOWING
VACCINATED AFTER BITE:
DISPOSITION UNKNOWN? ~ NEGATIVE ~ YES NO NOT KNOWN
IF YES, WHEN:
VICTIM NOTIFIED:YES DATE. NO iNCONCLUSIVE ~ LICENSED A~ER BITE:
'WRI~EN VERBAL YES NO NOT KNOWN
IF YES. WHEN:
FORWARD YELLOW COPY & QUARANTINE NOTICE ~O: Alameda County
COMMENTS: Vector Control Services'District
1131 Harbor Bay Parkway, Ste. 166
Alameda, CA 94502-6577
400-WD-1 (Rev. 10/98)
~ ATTAC[-ll~NT 2
I* ITY OF DUBLiN '
~. RO. Box 2340, Dubtin,, California 94568 ~' - City Offices, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin California 94568
September 17, 2003
Robert Bischoff
7609 Landate Ave.,
Dubli~.,~ CA.94568
CERTIFIED MAIL: 7001 1140 0002 8354 2626
NOTICE OF HEARING REGARDING VICIOUS DOG -
NOTICE IS HEREBY 'GIVEN that pursuant t0 the provisions of 5.3.6 of the Dublin
Municipal Code, the Director/Designee has certified there is, probable cause to believe
your dog, Buddy was involved in a dog bite incideni which occurred on August 28; 2003.
The final report was certified and received by the City on September 17, 2003.
FURTHER NOTICE. IS HEREBY GIVEN.that September' 24, 2003 at the hour. of 3:00'
p,m. at.the Dublin Civic Center, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, Alameda County, California,
the report from Alameda County Animal Control will be considered by the -
Director/Designee together with such other oral and documentary evidence bearing upon
the question.of whether further restrictions are required:to abate this public nuisance.
Youmay appear and may. present evidence at the hearing~
Please go to the City Manager's.Office on the second .floor where you will be. directed
the appropriate conference room ......
In the event your dog is found to be.vicious, it will be ordered to bi controlled, confined,
destroyed, restricted', or Otherwise abated as a public nuisance.and any impoundment cost '
incurred shall be assessed against 'you.
Amy'd~gham - .
Director/Designee
cc:- Tony Owens, Alameda Coun~ Animal COntrol
Jack C .arrillo-Zuniga
PSR/Iss c:animal/doghcaring/
ATTACHMENT 3
Administration (925) 833-6650 - City Councii (925) 833-6605 - Finance (925) 833-6640 - Building Inspection (925) 833-6620
Code Enforcement (925) 833-6620 · Engineering (925) 833-6630 · Parks & commdn'ity Services (925) 833-6645
Economic Devetooment (925) 833-6650 o Po!ice (925) 833-6670 o Public, Works (925') 833-6630
Community Development /925~ 833-6610 - Fire Prevention Bureau (925) 833-6606
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL
(CCP Section 1013(a) - 2015.5)
I am employed in the County of Alameda,
State of Califomia.
I am over the age of 18 years
and not a party to the within action;
my business address is 100 Civic Plaza,
Dublin, CA 94568.
On September 17, 2003 I served the attached
NOTICE OF VICIOUS DOG HEARING
on the parties m said 'action~by placing a
true copy thereof in a sealed envelope, addressed as follows:
Robert Bischoff
7609 Landale Ave.,
Dublin, CA 94568
BY MAIL, I placed such sealed envelope, with postage thereon fully prepaid for first-
class mail, for collection and mailing at City of Dublin, Dublin, California, following
ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with the practice of the City of Dublin
.... for collection and processing of correspondence, said practice, being that in the ordinary
course of business, correspondence is deposited in the United States Postal Service the
same day as it is placed for collection.
I declare under penalty of perjury
under the laws of the State of California th~it the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed at Dublin, California, on September 17, 2003
MINUTES
VICIOUS DOG HEARING
Dog: Buddy
Owner: Robert Bischoff
Victim: Jack Carrillo-Zuniga
Date of Incident: 8/28/03
Date of Hearing: 9/24/03
Present:
Amy Cunningham, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin
Deena Hambleton, 100'Civic Plaza, Dublin
Amy Cunningham opened the hearing. It was noted that the owner of the dog was not
present at this hearing.
She then reviewed the report presented by Animal Control (detail #152), and declared the
dog to be vicious according to the City of Dublin Mun. Codes 5.36.290 (A) (1) and (2),
and placed the following restrictions on "Buddy:
The owner shall take adequate precautions to ensure that the dog is only out of the fenced
backyard or residence when on a 6 foot leash, and under the direct control of a competent
adult. At no time shall "Buddy" be tethered.
The owner shall contact Animal Control for an inspection of the fences, gates, and
exterior doors at the residence. The inspection is to be scheduled within 15 days of
mailing ofAhefindings,-w~thlhe-inspection~eompte~ed 30days of-the mailing-date.-Any
repairs or modifications suggested by Animal Control will be completed at the owner's
expense within 30 days .of mailing of the findings.
Robert Bisch0ff is to enroll "Buddy" in certified obedience training which will be
completed within 90 days of the mailing date of the findings. Proof of Completion is
required within 10 days of course completion. If"Buddy" has had previous obedience
training, proof must be supplied within 10 days of the mailing date of the findings.
The owner must notify Ms. Cunningham within 10 days if the dog no longer resides
within the city limits.
If"Buddy" is found to be in violation of any of these restrictions, Animal Control will
immediately quarantine the dog until a hearing is conducted.
Any violation of these conditions shall be cause to.conduct another hearing.
ATTACHMENT 4
Although it is not required, Ms. Cunningham recommended that the owner obtain or
maintain owner/renter's insurance showing personal liability protection that covers.dog
bites or 'attacks.
Ms. Cunningham closed the meeting.
Respectfully,
Deena Hambleton, Secretary
VICIOUS DOG HEARING SIGN IN SHEET
Owner: Robert Bischoff
Dog: Buddy
Date of Incident: 08/28/03
Date of Hearing: 09/24/03
Time: '3:00 p.m.
PLEASE SIGN IN BELOW
IPlease Print Your Name Please Sign Your Name Address
· / ~ /, , ' ./,d, - /
CiTY OF DUBLIN
DATE: September 25, 2003
Robert ,BischOff
7609 Landale Ave.,
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Mr. Bischoff: CERTIFIED MAIL: 7001 1140 0002 8354 2602
Re: Transmittal of Violation of Vicious Dog Hearing Findings
On September 24, 2003, the City of Dublin conducted a vicious dog heating in
accordance with the Municipal. Code and the notice previously mailed to you. It was
noted that you were not present at this hearing. Enclosed are the Vicious Dog Hearing
Findings involving your dog.
Please note that restrictions have been placed on your dog. You should take all steps to
ensure that you comply with the restrictions. Failure to comply with these restrictions
will constitute a misdemeanor (Mun. Code Section 1.04.030). By refusing to cooperate,
the owner is subject to criminal penalties, including imprisonment in the County 'Jail for
up to six months, or a fine up to $1,000, or both.
If you have any questions, please feel free to conracz this office. Your cooperation in this
matter is appreciated.
Sincerely, r
· A:?? .Z? ,
Amy Cunningham
Adminislzative Analyst
cc: Tony Owens, DePartment of Field Services, Alameda County Animal Control
Jack Carrillo-Zuniga
ATTACHMENT
Area Code (925) - City Manager 833-6650 · City Council 833-6650 · Personnel 833-6605 · Economic Development 833-6650
Finance 833-6640 · Public Works/Engineering 833-6630 · Parks & Community Services 833-6645 · Police 833-6670
Planning/Code Entorcement 833~6610 · Building Inspection 833-6620 - Fire Prevention Bureau 833-6606
Printed on Recycled Paper
CITY'OF DUBLIN
100 Civic Plaza. Dublin, California 94568 Website: http://www, ci.dLJbtin.ca.us
FINDINGS and .ORDER
VICIOUS DOG HEARING
Dog: Buddy
Owner: Robert Bischoff
7Victim: Jack Carrillo-Zuniga
Date .of Incident: 08/28/03
Date of Hearing: 09/24/03
WHEREAS,'a hearing in accordance with Dublin Municipal Code (DMC) Section 5.36
was conducted on September 24, 2003; and
WHEREAS, the Owner of the dog was not present at the hearing; and
WHEREAS, based on the evidence presented at the hearing, the hearing officer found
that, on August' 28, 2003, Jack Carrillo-Zuniga was attacked and bitten by "Buddy"; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with DMC Section 5.36.290(A)(I) and (2), a dog is
presumed vicious when:
"An attack which requires a defensive action by any person.to prevent bodily
injury or property damage when such person is conducting himself or herself
peacefully and lawfully;" and
"An attack which results in an injury to a person when such person is conducting
himself or herself peacefully and lawfully;" and
WHEREAS, based upon the information presented at the hearing, the dog was declared
vicious in accordance with the Municipal Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, in accordance with Section 5.36.340 of the Dublin Municipal
Code, the following 'restrictions are imposed .to address this nuisance:
1. The owner shall take adequate precautions to ensure that the dog is only out of the
fenced backyard or residence when on a six (6) foot leash, .and under the direct
control of a competent.adult. At no time shall "Buddy". be chained or tethered.
2. The owner shall contact Animal Control at 925-803-7040 for an inspection of the
fences, gates, and exterior doors. This inspection is to be scheduled within 15 days
of mailing of the hearing findings, with the inspection to be completed within 30
days of mailing of the hearing findings. Any repairs or modifications suggested by
Animal Control at or after the inspection shall be completed at the owner's expense
Area Code f925 · City Manager 833-6650 - City Council 833-6650 · Personnel 833-6605 - Economic Development 833-6650
Finance 833-6640 - Public Works/Engmeenng 833-6~30 · P~irks & Community Services 833-.6645 · Police 833-6670
Planning/Code Enforcement 833-6610 · Building Inspecnon 833-6820 - Fire Prevention Bureau 833-6606
?rinted on Recycled F~aper
within 50 days ofmailing ofthe hearing findings.
3. The owner shall enroll "Buddy". in certified obedience training which shall be
completed within 90 days of mailing of the hearing findings. Proof shall be supplied
within 10 days of completion of the course. If,Buddy" has had previous obedience
training, proof of completion shall be supplied within 10. days of mailing of the
hearing findings.
4. The owner must notify the CityofDublin's Director/Designee within 10 days if.the
dog no longer resides within the city limits.
5. If"Buddy" is found to be in violation of any of the restrictions contained in these
£mdings, Animal Control shall immediately quarantine the dog until a hearing is
conducted.
6. Any violation of these conditions, may be cause to conduct another hearing to
determine whether further restrictions are required.
7. In accordance with Section 5.36.340, this decision shall be final.
Amy ~r~ingham~.~Director/Designee
Note: While the following action is not required, it is recommended:
The owner should obtain or maintain owner/renter's insurance showing personal liability
protection that covers dog bites or attacks.
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL
(CCP Section 1013(a) - 2015..5)
I am employed in the County of Alameda,
State of California.
I am over the age of 18 years
and not a party to the within action;
my business address is 100 Civic Plaza,
Dublin, CA '94568.
On September 25, 2003 I served the attached
NOTICE OF VICIOUS DOG HEARING FINDINGS
on the parties to said action by.placing a
true copy thereof in a sealed envelope, addressed as follows:
' Robert Bischoff
7609 Landale Ave.,
Dublin, CA 94568
BY MAIL, I placed such sealed envelope, with postage thereon fully prepaid for first-
class mail, for collection and mailing at City of Dublin, Dublin, California, following
ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with the practice of the City of Dublin
for collection and processing of correspondence, said practice being that in the ordinary
course of business, correspondence is deposited in the United States Postal Service the
same day as it is placed for collection.
I declare under penalty of perjury
under the laws of the State of Califomia that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed at Dublin, California, on September 25, 2003
- once,ri s
. F~LD SERVICES, 4595 GLEASON DRY, DUBLIN, CA ~568.
CHARI,ES (,. PLUMMER, SHERI
MARBI-IAL - tSORONER - PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR
DIOR OF EMERGE~G~ SERVICES
M]EMORAND UM
Date: Nov 21, 2003
From: T. Scheibner,t Slieriffs Technician, Alameda County Animal Control Officer
To: Amy Cunningham, Administrative Analyst
Subj: Serving Vicious 'Dog Hearing Papers
Per our re u¢ ~ '
y q ~ approximately 1730 ho~, 11-7-03, I., delivered papers regarding a Vicious Dog
Hearing to Robert Bischoff, at his residence,-~7~Bg-L~idale Avenue, Dublin, CA' 94568.
ATTACHMENT 6
NOU-24-20a3 10:34 TEL)gEsBO37S?B ID)CITY OF DUBLIN
ALAS ,I _ DA .CO UNTY SHERIFF k 'FICE
- FIELD SER VICES
Page 1 of 2
Type of Report: Bite Detail Number: 158
Date of Report: November 15, 2003 .Incident Date: November 10, 2003
Reporting Officer G.F. Potstada III #69
OWner Bischoff Robert M. 04-30-85 18
Last Name' First Name MI DOB Age
7609 Landale Awe Dublin 94568
Address City ZIP
925-828-1186
Home TelePhone: Work Telephone: ,,,
Victim Banks Darryl L. 12
Last Name First Name MI DOB Age
~ ......... ~ ...... .~ Dublin 94568
Address City ZIP
............ ' N/A
Home Telephone: VCork Telephone:
Guardian Banks Kowana M. ~ 35
Last Name First Name MI DOB Age
'~ - ....... '. · Dublin 94568
Address ~ ZIP
Home Telephone Work Telephone
Witness ~-" ? ~ ~r~
Last'Name Fkst N~e MI DOB Age
Home Telephone: Work Telephone:
Animal: Canine Breed: Rottweiler
Color: Black & Tan Sex: Male
Age: 2 years Weight: 95 lbs.
Name: Buddy Rabies Tag No. .Current Exp. 07-12-06
License No. None CiW: Dublin
Quarantined At East County Animal Shelter Master Sheet No. F39364
Vicious Dog Hearing Recommendation X Yes No Field Servi6es BiteForm
ATTACHI~ENT 7
Page 2 of 2
On 11-10-03 Animal Control Officer T. Scheibner responded to detail #I 58 at 'the request of Dublin Police
Services regarding a contained dog in at 7678 Ironwood Drive in DUblin.' Officer Scheibner picked up the dog
and brought it to the East County Animal Shelter. Officer Scheibner stated that Dublin Police had responded to
a call earlier in the day regarding a dog 'chasing children in the area. Dublin Police Services had responded to
the Call and Deputy J. Del Rio # 1156 with the assistance of the homeowner at 7678 Ironwood Drive were able
to confine the dog. in the backyard of that address until Officer Scheibner was able to pick the dog up at 1740
hours.
Scheibner indicated' to me that there might have been a bite involved with this .dog, but was unable to obtain any
further information at the time. Scheibner also pointed out that the dog had recently been in the East County
Animal Shelter the previous week. I also recognized the dog from having been in the' shelter a few days earlier.
A records check revealed that the dog "Buddy" had been taken into the shelter as a stray on 11-07-03 and
redeemed by its owner, Robert Bischoff on 11-'08-03.
On 11-12-03 I received a call from Deputy J. Del Rio informing me that the dog did in fact bite a child that day.
Del Rio provided me with the name, address, and telephone number. I Contacted Kowana Banks, mother of Bite
victim Darryl Banks. Banks stated that Darrvl and some of his friends were playing basketball at another friends
house at 7666 Ironwood Drive in Dublin when the dog showed up. Banks said that Darryl and his friends were
playing with the dog when the bite occurred. Darryl received one long puncture wound to the lower right side of
his back. Darryl was treated for his injuries at St. Rose hospital in Hayward. Banks also stated that she believed
the'bite to be as a result of play, not ag~ession on the part of the dog.
On 11-I3-03 about 1400 hours I was at the East County Animal Shelter in Dublin when the dog owner's father,
Michael Bischoff, of the same address, came into the shelter to check on "Buddy". I cited Bischoff for the
following violations, of Dublin Municipal Code:
5.36.220 Dog at Large
5.36.270 Biting or Attacking
A further records check revealed that '!Buddy" had a previous Dog Bite on record from 08-28-03 and a Vicious
Dog Heating on 09-24-03. "Buddy" is currently under 1 O-day bite quarantine at the East County Animal
Shelter.
· '~ "' t
I recommend a Vicious Dog Hearing. , ....~/l t/73
/If"l/t ', ?
?/
i
George F. Potstada I~ #69
Animal Control Officer
Alameda County Sheriffs Office
CT: .', [ ,
R.ABIES CONTROL INVESTIGATION REPORT Reporl #
vco: ALAMED~A COUNTY IZEALTH CA~ SERVICES AGENCY
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH VECTOR CONTROL SERVICES DISTRICT MS~
~/~:
Fo~ard yell,ow copy & quarantine notice within 48 hours to Vector Control District
(FIRST~ {LAS~ AGE
PERSON [. ~ ~¢~' ~ . ~ ~-5
BI~EN ~ET c~ zip CODE TELEP~~ :].~.~ ~,..~ -
wo~~
LOCATION OF WOUNDS
LOCATION DATE OF BITE ~ ADDRESS: NUMBER STREET CITY ZIP CODE
INCIDENT was TREATMENT GIVEN TO VICTIM? ~ NO IF NO, DID YOU ADVISE VICTIM TO SEEK TREATMENT? YES NO
-- NAME OF PHYSICIAN OR HOSPITAL ~1 ~% -- ~S~ -- ~~ TELEPHONE NUMBER
DESCRIPTION OF ANIMAL
DOMESTIC: ~ CAT OTHER
OWNED STRAY
OWNER O~ ~ -'
ANIMAL '-~~ ~/¢~ ~¢~ WILD: SKUNK BAT OTHER
AND CiTY Z~P CODE [ TELEPHONE ~O C~MPLETE THE FOLLOWING
HOME¢ AGE LESS THAN FOUR MONTHS
LOCATION ~~ ~¢~ WORK~ ' FOUR MOTHS AND OLDER
OF - ~OT K~O~
ANIMAL ANIMAL NOW UNDER QUARANTINE? ~ NO CURRENTLY LICENSED:
YES NO NOT KNOWN
LOCATION ANIMAL SHELTER ~ KENNEL ~
LICENSE No.
V~ERINARY HOSPITAL ~ OWNER'S PREMISES
VACOINATE~OR E ,BITE:
ADDRESS ~ ~¢~ ~. ~ NO NOT KNOWN
TELEPHONE ~' ~-- ~ DATE OF VACCINATION
-- _.
.EPOR~I ~_ ~_ ~..~~. ~¢~ TELEPHONE NO. - DATE
~TOURCE I~ DIFFERENT
PREPARED BY ¢%'/~ ~'//
HAN VICTIM OR OWNER NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE.NC,
DATE DATE CASE
RECEIVED CLOSED, CLOSED BY HEAD SENZ TO LABORATORY: REPORT RECEIVED
ANIMAL CH ECK FOR WITHIN 48 HOURS OF A~ACK:
YES DATE YES NO
PROPER ISO~TION? YES DATE NO ~RAY RECOVERED:
YES NO NOT STRAY
RELEASED FROM QUARANTINE BY DATE NO DATE VICTIM GIVEN ANTI*RABIESTREATME~:
ANIMAL: DIED? YES DATE. NO RESLILTS YES NO ~OT KNOWN
KILLED? YES DATE NO POSITIVE ,~ COMPL~E THE FOLLOWING
VACCINATED A~ER BITE:
DISPOSITION UNKNOWN? ~ NEGATIVE ~ YES ~O NOT KNOWN
IF YES. WHEN:
VICTIM NOTIFIED:YES DATE NO INCONCLUSIVE ~ LICENSED A~ER BITE:
WRI~EN VERBAL YES NO NOT KNOWN
IF YES. WHEN:
FORWARD YELLOW COPY & QUARANTINE NOTICE TO: Alameda County
COMMENTS: Vector Control SLuices District
1131 Harbor Bay Parkway, Ste. 166
Alameda, CA 94502-6577
'x~ ~,t~~' 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin. Californ,a 94568
-'~ Website: http:/fwww.ci.ciubtin.ca.us
November 19, 2003
Robert Bischoff
7609 Landale Ave.,
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Mr. Bisehoff: CERTIFIED MAIL: 7001 1140 0002 8354 1797
The purpose ofthis letter is to irfform you that you are' in violation o£the Vicious Dog Findings
dated September 24, 2003. You have not complied with restriction #1, "The owner' shall.take
adequate precautions to ensure that the dog is. only out o£ the fenced backyard when on a six (6)
toot leash, and under the direct zontrol, of a competent aduk. At no time shall Buddy bechained
or.tethered." You have also not complied with restriction #2, "The owner shall contact Animal
Control at 925-803-7040 for an inspection o£the fences, gazes, and exterior doors. This
inspection is to be scheduled with~ 15 days of mailing of the hearing findings, with the
inspection to be completed within 30 days o£maiting 0£the hearing findings. Any repairs or
modifications suggested by Animal Control shall be completed'at the owner's expense within 50
days o£ mailing of the hearing £mdings."
For your reference, I have enclosed a copy oft, he Vicious Dog Hearing Findings that were
mailed to you on. September 24, 2003.
In accordance with finding #5, violation o£ any condition may.be cause to conduct .another
hearing. This is to inform.you that a new hearing has been scheduled for November 25, 2003, at
9:30 a.m. at Dublin Police Services, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, Alameda County, California.
Please go'the front counter at Dublin Police Services whereyou will be directed to the
appro_~ia_te eozff~rencexoom. _ .......................................
Your cooperation ~ tt~s mauCr is ~reat]y appreciated.
Sincerely,
-A~y Cmmi~ba~
Adz~_rdslz~fiye Azm]yst
cc: Tony O~ens, Dept. F~e]d Sez~ices, Alameda Cotmty Az~a] 'Control
Eowazm Ba~(s, Paze~t/GuaM~a~ o£Daz~y] Ba=~s
ATTACHMENT 8
'Area Code (925) · City Manager 833-6650 · City Council 833-6650 - Personnel 833-6605 - Economic DeveloPment 833-6650
Finance :333-6640 · Public Works/Engineering 833-8630 , Parks & Community Services 833-664.5 · Police 833-6670
Plarm~ng/Code Enforcement S33-6610 . Buildin,q inspection 833-6620 · Fwe Prevention Bureau 833-6606
?rinted 2n Recvcted F~c3oer
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL
(CCP Section 1013(a)- 20'15:5)
I am employed in the County of Alameda,
State of California.
I am over the. age of I 8 years
and not a party to the within action;
my business address is 100 Civic Plaza,
Dublin, CA 94568.
On November 19, 2003'I served the attached
NOTICE OF VIOLATION OF VICIOUS DOG HEARING FINDINGS
on the parties to said action by placing a
true copy thereof in a sealed envelope,, addressed as follows:
Robert Bischoff
7609 Landale Ave.,
Dublin, CA 94568
'BY MAIL, I placed such sealed envelope, with postage thereon fully prepaid for first-
claSs mail, for collection and mailing at city of Dublin, Dublin, California, following
ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with the practice of the City of Dublin
for collection and processing of correspondence, said practice being that in the ordinary
.................... _cpur~__o_f_~gS~'_.m_.~s~,__correspondenceJs~deposited_in._the United StatesPostat- Service~he same day as it is placed for collection.
I declare under penalty of perjury
under the laws of the State Of California that the
foregoing is tree and correct.
Executed at Dublin, California, on November 19, 2003
7001 1140 0002 8354 1797
· Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete A. Received by (Please Print Clearly) B. Date of Delivery
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
· Print your name and address on the reverse
Signature
so that we can return the card to you. [] Agent
· Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, X [] Addressee
or on the front if space permits.
D, Is delive~ address different from item 17 [] Yes
1. Article Addressed to: If YES, enter delivery address below:
3. Service Type
~ ~' ~ ~._ [~;LCertified Mail [] Express Mail
~~ I [] Registered [] Return Receipt for Merchandise
~ ~-~ ~ I--I Insured Mail []C.O.D.
~ 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) [] Yes
PS Form 3811, July 1999 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-00-M-0952
+ +!
MINUTES
VICIOUS DOG HEARING
Dog: Buddy
Owner: Robert Bischoff
Date of Incident: 11/10/03
Date of Heating: 11/25/03
Present:
Amy Curmingham, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin
Deena Hambleton, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin
George Potstada, 4595 Gleason Drive, Dublin
Robert Bischoff, 7609 Landate Avenue,Dublin
Adam Clifford, 6638 Hemlock Street, Dublin
Amy Cunningham opened, the hearing by explaining the rules of conduct and procedures
for this hearing and remedies available to abate any nuisance (leash law compliance
humane destruction of the dog).
It was noted that this hearing is being conducted to address the .violation of findings from
the previous vicious dog hearing that was held on September 24, 2003. She then advised
that Animal Control had provided additional information after this heating was scheduled
that would be considered.
The additional information summarized in Animal Control Detail #158 was presented to
those in attendance and attendees were then asked if they had any additional information
to submit. It was noted that one of the incidents ou_ttine_dir~thisreport_in~ol.v_ed_axtog
bite to a child when thedog was loose, as well as another incident in which the dog was
loose in violation of the previous hearing findings.
Ms. Cunningham mentioned that Robert Bischoff did not attend the'first hearing. Mr.
Bischoff stated that he was not notified. Ms. Cunningham told him that he signed the
certified mail card for the heating notice. The signed card is in file. She also stated that
the findings from this first hearing were hand delivered to Mr. Bischoffby Animal
Control Officer Tom Scheibner. A memo from Officer Scheibner that reflects this
service is in file.
Ms. Cunningham asked Animal Control Officer Potstada if"Buddy" was still at the
shelter. Officer Potstada stated that the dog was still there, and still unlicensed.
Ms. Cunningham stated that this incident was the second documented time that "Buddy"
was running loose since the first hearing, and the second time he bit a child. She
explained again that Robert Bischoffwas in violation of the first hearing findings. She
ATTACHMENT 9
stated that the dog has not been adequately contained, and Animal Control has not been
contacted to do a property insPection to ensure that the dog can be adequately contained.
'Robert stated that "Buddy" is not a vicious dog. He also s_aid that his dog keeps getting
out because he can jump over the fence. Robert insisted that he did not know before that
"Buddy" was capable of jumping over the fence. Ms. Cunningham stated that "Buddy"
was declared a vicious dog at the previous hearing. She also stated that when Robert
knew that "Buddy" could get out of the backyard, he still declined to take any action to
adequately contain his dog. She also mentioned that given his recent behavior, "Buddy"
poses a public .health risk.
Robert asked if he could get his dog returned .~o him. Ms. Cunningham told him that the
dog would remain at the shelter. Robert asked what would happen to "Buddy." Ms
Curmingham told him that Animal Control staff would evaluate "Buddy" for potential
adoption, or placement with a iescue group. Robert asked again if he could get his dog
released to him. Ms. Cunningham again stated that the dog would stay at the shelter, and
Would not be released to him or any member of his family.
Finally, Robert asked if he could "adopt him back", and Ms. Cunningham said "no."
Robert was advised he would receive a written copy of the findings via mail.
Ms. Cunningham closed the meeting.
Respectfully,
Deena Hambleton, Secretary
Note: Animal Control Officer Potstada stated that a records check at the shelter revealed
....... -- ....... -that this-was-the~ third-time-that-'~Buddy~':- was-running -leo se. ~-"~Buddy~'-was 'picked-up .....................
11/7/03, and taken to the sheker as a stray dog. On 11/8/03, the dog was released to
Robert Bischoff. Ms. Cunningham was not notified of this.impound until after the
release.
VICIOUS DOG HEARING SIGN IN SHEET
Owner: Robert Bischoff
Dog: Buddy
Date of Incident: 11/10/03
Date of Hearing: 11/25/03
Time: 9:30 a.m.
-PLEASE SIGN IN BELOW
Please Print Your Name Please Sign Your Name Address
CITY OF-DUBLIN _.
~ O0 Civic', Plaza, Dublin California 04568 --' Websi~e: mxp://www.ci.du 31in.ca us
DATE: December .1, 2003
Robert Bischoff
7609 Landale Ave.,
Castro Valley, CA 94552
Dear Mr. Bischoff: CERTIFIED MAIL: 7001 1140 0002 8354 1810
Re: Transmittal of Violation of Vicious Dog Hearing Findings
On November 25, 2003, the City of Dublin conducted a vicious dog hearing in
accordance with the Municipal Code and the notice previously mailed to you. EnclOsed
are the Vicious Dog Hearing Findings involving your dog. ..
Please note that your dog will not be returned to you. "Buddy'~ will remain at the East
County Animal Shelter.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact this office. Your cooperati on in this
matter is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Am)' Cunningi~am
Administrative Analyst
cc: Tony Owens, Department of Field Services, Alameda County Animal Control
Kowana Banks, Guardian of Darryl Banks
ATTACHMENT 10
Area Code (925) · City Manager 833-6650 · City Council 833-6650 o Personnel 833-6605 - Economic Development 833-6650
Finance 833-6640 · Public Works/Engineering 833-6630 - Parks & Community Services 833-6645 · Police 833-6670
Planning/Code Enforce'men{ 833-6610 - Building inspection 833-6620 - Fire Prevention Bureau 833-6606
Printed o.n Recvc/ed Paper
"-~-z~ ]00 Civic Plaza, Dublin California 94568 Website: httD:/'www.ci.duolin.ca.us
FINDINGS
VICIOUS DOG HEARING
Dog: Buddy
Owner: Robert Bischoff
Date of Incident: 11/10/03
Date of Hearing: 11/25/03
WHEREAS, a hearing in accordance with Dublin Municipal Code (DMC) Chapter 5.36 was
conducted on November 25, 2003,.to determine whether the dog, "Buddy," is a vicious dog
pursuant to DMC Section 5.36.290; and
WHEREAS, the Owner of".Buddy" was present at the hearing; and
WHEREAS, a previous hearing was held on September24, 2003, and based upon information
presented at that hearing, the Hearing Officer declared "Buddy" vicious according to Dublin
Municipal Code 5.36.290 (A) (1) and (2), and restrictions were placed on the dog; and
WHEREAS, the owner of"Buddy" signed for the certified copy of the hearing notice on
September 19, 2003, but did not attend the September 24th hearing; and
WHEREAS, on October 23, 2003, the United States Postal Service returned the certified copy
of the hearing findings to the City of Dublin as unclaimed by the dog owner, but the regular mail
copy was not returned; and
WHEREAS, the dog owner was personally served by an Animal Control Officer with the
findings from the September 24th hearing on November. 7, 2003, but did not appeal the findings;
and
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2003, the Hearing Officer determined that the dog owner did not
comply with certain restrictions placed on the dog at the previous hearing, and notices were
issued for a hearing on November 25, 2003, to address these violations; and
WHEREAS, on November 2 l, 2003, detail #158 was received from Animal Control as
"Buddy" was held at the shelter for running loose on November 7, 2003; and, on November 10,
2003, "Buddy" was again running loose and attacked and bit minor child Darryl Banks in
violation of the restrictions placed on him at the September 24, 2003, vicious dog hearing; and
WHEREAS, in compliance with previous hearing findings "Buddy" was quarantined at East
County Animal Shelter on November 10th, pending this hearing; and
Area Code ~925 - City Manager 833-6650 · City Council 833-6650 · Personnel 833-6605 - Economic Devel~pment 833-6650
Finance 833-664.0 ' PublicWorks/Engineering 833-6630 ~ Parks & Community Services 833-6645 · Police 833-6670
Planning/Code Enforcement 833-6610 - Building insoecnon 833-6620 - Fire Prevention Bureau 833-6606
Frinted on ?,ecvcled Paper
WHEREAS, the evidence at the hearing demonstrated, and the hearing officer hereby finds, that
Buddy was running loose on both November 7, 2003, and November 10, 2003, in violation of
previous findings, which required the owner to ensure that Buddy did. not escape from the
premises, and in violation of DMC section 5.36.220; and
WltEREAS, the evidence at the hearing demonstrated, and the hearing officer hereby finds, that
the dog owner did not contact Animal Control within 15 days of mailing of the hearing findings
to schedule an inspection of the fences, gates, and exterior doors; and
WltEREAS, the evidence at the hearing demonstrated, and the hearing officer hereby finds, that
on'November 10, 2003, Buddy, while loose, bit minor child Darryl Banks, an attack which
meets the criteria for a finding of viciousness under 5.36.290(A)(1); and
WHEREAS, the dog owner's failure to comply with the conditions of the previous order and
Buddy's further acts of viciousness demonstrate the .pressing need for a more stringent
abatement order than had previouslY been imposed in order to protect the public.
NOW, THEREFORE, in accordance with Section 5.36.340 of the Dublin Municipal Code, the
following is imposed to address this nuisance:
1. To protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community, "Buddy" shall not be returned to
his owner, any family member, or associate. The dog shall remain in the care of Animal
Control staff until 'it has been determined if the dog should be re-adopted by an unassociated
party; sent to a rescue organization; or humanely destroyed.
2. In accordance with Section 5.36.340, this decision shall be final.
.%t~
Signed:
esl neeAt~n
y ~unningham, T)irector/D 'g
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
You have the right to appeal this decision to the City Council. Any appeal must be filed within five (5) calendar
days from. the date of issuance of this decision. A Notice of Appeal must be filed with the City Clerk and shall state
specific grounds as to why the decision should not be approved. Failure to file an appeal within the specified time
limit shall constitute a waiver of the right to appeal and the attached decision shall be final.
"Here
~ ~estr~elivew Fee / / ~
CITY OF DUBLIN
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 1, 2003
TO: Vicious Dog Hearing File - Bischoff
FROM: Amy Cunningham, Administrative Analys~j
SUBJECT: Personal Service of Vicious Dog Hearing Finding
On December 1, 2003, at approximately 3:00 PM, Mr. Robert Bischoff was-personally served with a
copy of the findings from the Vicious Dog Hearing, which was held on November 25, 2003. Service
was.completed at the conclusion of the Civil Ex Parte hearing, outside Department' 707 of the
Gale/Schenone Hall of Justice, 5672 Stoneridge Dr., Pleasanton, CA.
ATTACI-llVIENT 11
ATTACHMENT 12
Alameda' County Dog License
The person named below is hereby granted ~an Alameda County License to keep a dog.
~-~,j~ ~,o~'o No. AC43233B
o.
Date~~ '~=~ Phone ~" ~ --//~?~
Rabies Vaccination Expiration Date ~_,//,~/O~
Breed ~~ ....... Color ..~/~ 6~ ~ Cash~Reck/~
OWNER'S COPY
ALlClA BISGHOFF . 90-7162/3222 ' I 1 1
MICHAEL E. BISCHOFF 0924678454
7609 ~NDALE AVE. -
DUBLIN. CA 94568 ~a~
~$~ ~ ,,
Alameda County Sheriff's Office
FIELD SERVICES, 4595 GLEASON DRIVE. DUBLIN, CA 94568
(925) 803-7040 · FAX (925) 803-7044
CHARLES C. PLUMMER. SHERIFF
MARSHAL - CORONER - PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR
DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
MEMORANDUM
Date: December 15, 2003
From: ACO, Bowman, B. #3 ~
To: Amy Cunningham, Administrative Assistant, City of Dublin
Re: Bischoff Fence Inspection
On 120803 at 1404, I received a detail from dispatch to make contact with Bischoffregarding a
fence inspection. After making contact with Bischoff a fence inspection was scheduled for
121503 anYtime before noon.
On 121503 at 1030, I arrived at the Bischoffresidence and proceeded with the inspection. I
found the fence old but basically in good condition. I made three recommendations. One was to
remove a large door leaning against the west fence to keep dog from going over fence. Two was
to put a padlock on east gate. Three was to screw sheet metal to bottom of rear gate leading to
adjacent school to keep dog l~om chewing or digging under. There is a wood-pile against the
east fence but I felt this was not a problem due to the type o£plastic sheeting covering it. I gave
· the Bischoff's one week to comply with the recommendation. I will return on 122203.
On 122203 at 1230, I arrived at the Bischoffresidence for a re-inspection on the three
recommendations I made on the previous visit. I found Bischoffin compliance.
1318 Raih'oad Ave.
Livermore, Ca. 94550
Phone: (925) 456-8387
Fax: (925) 456~8388
EAX COVER SHEET
Office location: Office. localion: L~vem~ore, C~ifomta
Fax nm~tber' ~ - ~, - Phone number: (925) 456-8387
'__ lJl.~ent __J R~ply .a2~AP __.j Please co~mnent __j Pleas~ review __i For your intbrmation
Total pages, including cover: t
January 6. 2004
To the City of Dublin
Re: Case t 604 - Vicious Dog Hearing
Subject: Buddy, 2 year old Rottweiier
I have imeracted with Buddy on several different occasions and have fbund him to be
kind and gentle. I had an occasion to go camping overnight with him; he was obedient
and did not attempt to bite me. Please return Buddy' to his owners and do not put him ro
sleep.
'I"hm~ you.
Respectfullyl
r
· ,, ! 4 4,.<.., ! , " ....
~ni Masukawa
TO ADDRESS DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL
Please complete this form and submit it to the CITY CLERK in
order that information can be accurately entered into the minutes.
The MAYOR will give anyone who wishes to address the
Council an opportunity to do so at the appropriate time.
SUBJECT ~d ~ C~ - ~'~O a {3 k/
,! wish to speak.
I DO NOT wish to SPE~, but would like to have ~e follow~g cogent(s)
entered ~to ~e public record:
K2/G/cc-mtgs/spkrslip. doc
Attachmentq